People v. The North River Insurance Co.
Annotate this Case
North River and its bail agent, Bad Boys Bail Bonds, moved in superior court to set aside the summary judgment against them as void because it was entered by a different superior court judge from the one who had declared the forfeiture.
The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion, holding that Penal Code section 1306 plainly requires the court that declared the forfeiture to enter the summary judgment. However, that language does not state, and does not mean, that the same judge of the court must enter both orders. In this case, the trial court did not err in denying the North River parties' motion to set aside the summary judgment; the record before Judge Kim reflected the earlier declaration of forfeiture, the expiration of the appearance period during which forfeiture could be vacated and the absence of a pending motion to vacate forfeiture; with that information, Judge Kim was required to enter summary judgment in accordance with the bond's terms; and thus there was no due process violation.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.